Originally posted by xrtoronto
at the very least that hit would be ruled boarding and a penalty given; If I were ref I would add 'intent to injure' for an additional 5 and a game misconduct
to hit someone the way Cambell hit Umberger takes alot more skill and timing than to cheap-shot someone into the boards
Even though you are from canada, I'd wager that you know nothing about hockey at all. These 2 sentences prove it.
That hit right there is borderline suspension-worthy. I'd have to see a few other angles of it, but from that one, it looks like a hit from behind with intent to injure to me... At any rate, a bench-clearer (and yet, there isn't a brawl - what sort of sissy league is this? )
Unfortunately, I don't have a TV to watch the games, but it's dissapointing that so few people know nothing about the rules.
It's not hard to see at all. The player that got checked WAS FACING THE OTHER GUY.
In hockey, if you go into a corner, stop, and turn away from the boards, you deserve to get thrown through the glass.
Open ice hit vs. one body being forced into a solid object...
Oarges and Apples.
No, not at all. That isn't anywhere near being a decent statement.
What happens if you miss on open ice? At worst, you trip on the other guy. Big ****ing deal.
What happens if you miss on the boards? You hit the boards with the same force you were going to hit the other guy.
This is why the rules are in place the way they are now. If your back is turned, it is a penalty to hit you. It is a penalty to lead with your stick. Any other time, you're just a handsomehunk for doing something stupid.
